把握初级保健团队的脉搏:大型初级保健网络中的提供者和工作人员的健康和倦怠

R. Sifri, A. Cunningham, C. Arenson, Alexis Silverio
{"title":"把握初级保健团队的脉搏:大型初级保健网络中的提供者和工作人员的健康和倦怠","authors":"R. Sifri, A. Cunningham, C. Arenson, Alexis Silverio","doi":"10.1370/afm.20.s1.2789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Assessment of wellness and burnout in primary care often focuses on providers. Less is known about wellness and burnout in other primary care team members, including actions that would improve wellness. Objective: To assess wellness and burnout in primary care providers and staff and identify actions to increase work-related wellness. Study Design: Cross-sectional survey. Setting: Jefferson Health system, with 100 primary care practices in the Philadelphia region. Population studied: Survey was emailed to all primary care providers and staff (N=1155) in February 2021, including providers, behavioral health consultants, nurses, medical assistants and all other clinical staff, quality/research staff, and all administrative staff. Instrument: Thirty-item survey: demographic items (age, sex, race/ethnicity, practice region, professional role), Perceived Stress Reactivity Prolonged Reactivity Subscale (PRS), Abbreviated Maslach Burnout Inventory (aMBI) with emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment subscales, Mini-Z Burnout Survey , 1-10 rating of work-related wellness, and an open-ended question asking what one thing would improve work-related wellness. Outcome Measures: Primary outcomes were average wellness and burnout scores: mean(standard deviation) (SD) PRS, mean (SD) aMBI emotional exhaustion, median and interquartile range aMBI depersonalization and personal accomplishment, mean(SD) Mini-Z score and response to Mini-Z burnout item, and mean(SD) 1-10 wellness rating. Responses were compared across demographic categories for significant differences (p<.05). Open-ended responses were analyzed for themes. Results: 429 providers and staff completed the survey (37% response rate). All roles were represented. Mean PRS score was 3.89(1.55), aMBI: emotional exhaustion: 9.11(5.25), depersonalization 1.00(4.00), personal accomplishment 15.00(4.00), Mini-Z 32.09(3.99) with 48% reporting some burnout, and 5.85(2.45) on 1-10 wellness scale. Results varied significantly by region and role. Open-ended responses (N=202) recommended increased staffing, increased administrative time, and better practice and leadership communication/teamwork. Conclusions: Our sample reported elevated prolonged stress reactivity but similar/slightly lower burnout than prior studies. Findings were shared with participants and action steps developed; survey will be readministered every 6 months.","PeriodicalId":199163,"journal":{"name":"Practice management and organization","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Taking the pulse of primary care teams: Provider and staff wellness and burnout in a large primary care network\",\"authors\":\"R. Sifri, A. Cunningham, C. Arenson, Alexis Silverio\",\"doi\":\"10.1370/afm.20.s1.2789\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Context: Assessment of wellness and burnout in primary care often focuses on providers. Less is known about wellness and burnout in other primary care team members, including actions that would improve wellness. Objective: To assess wellness and burnout in primary care providers and staff and identify actions to increase work-related wellness. Study Design: Cross-sectional survey. Setting: Jefferson Health system, with 100 primary care practices in the Philadelphia region. Population studied: Survey was emailed to all primary care providers and staff (N=1155) in February 2021, including providers, behavioral health consultants, nurses, medical assistants and all other clinical staff, quality/research staff, and all administrative staff. Instrument: Thirty-item survey: demographic items (age, sex, race/ethnicity, practice region, professional role), Perceived Stress Reactivity Prolonged Reactivity Subscale (PRS), Abbreviated Maslach Burnout Inventory (aMBI) with emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment subscales, Mini-Z Burnout Survey , 1-10 rating of work-related wellness, and an open-ended question asking what one thing would improve work-related wellness. Outcome Measures: Primary outcomes were average wellness and burnout scores: mean(standard deviation) (SD) PRS, mean (SD) aMBI emotional exhaustion, median and interquartile range aMBI depersonalization and personal accomplishment, mean(SD) Mini-Z score and response to Mini-Z burnout item, and mean(SD) 1-10 wellness rating. Responses were compared across demographic categories for significant differences (p<.05). Open-ended responses were analyzed for themes. Results: 429 providers and staff completed the survey (37% response rate). All roles were represented. Mean PRS score was 3.89(1.55), aMBI: emotional exhaustion: 9.11(5.25), depersonalization 1.00(4.00), personal accomplishment 15.00(4.00), Mini-Z 32.09(3.99) with 48% reporting some burnout, and 5.85(2.45) on 1-10 wellness scale. Results varied significantly by region and role. Open-ended responses (N=202) recommended increased staffing, increased administrative time, and better practice and leadership communication/teamwork. Conclusions: Our sample reported elevated prolonged stress reactivity but similar/slightly lower burnout than prior studies. Findings were shared with participants and action steps developed; survey will be readministered every 6 months.\",\"PeriodicalId\":199163,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Practice management and organization\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Practice management and organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.20.s1.2789\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Practice management and organization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.20.s1.2789","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:评估健康和倦怠在初级保健往往侧重于提供者。人们对其他初级保健团队成员的健康和倦怠知之甚少,包括改善健康的措施。目的:评估初级保健提供者和工作人员的健康和倦怠,并确定提高工作相关健康的措施。研究设计:横断面调查。环境:杰斐逊卫生系统,在费城地区有100个初级保健实践。人口研究:调查于2021年2月通过电子邮件发送给所有初级保健提供者和工作人员(N=1155),包括提供者、行为健康顾问、护士、医疗助理和所有其他临床工作人员、质量/研究人员以及所有行政人员。工具:30项调查:人口统计项目(年龄,性别,种族/民族,实践地区,职业角色),感知压力反应性延长反应性子量表(PRS),带情绪衰竭的缩略Maslach倦怠量表(aMBI),人格解体和个人成就子量表,Mini-Z倦怠调查,工作健康1-10评分,以及一个开放式问题,问什么能改善工作健康。结果测量:主要结果为平均健康和倦怠得分、平均(标准差)PRS、平均(SD) aMBI情绪耗竭、平均(SD) aMBI去个人化和个人成就感、平均(SD) Mini-Z得分和对Mini-Z倦怠项目的反应、平均(SD) 1-10健康评分。对不同人口统计类别的反应进行比较,发现有显著差异(p< 0.05)。对开放式回答进行主题分析。结果:429名医护人员完成了调查,回复率为37%。所有角色都有代表。平均PRS得分为3.89分(1.55分),aMBI得分为:情绪耗竭得分为9.11分(5.25分),人格解体得分为1.00分(4.00分),个人成就感得分为15.00分(4.00分),Mini-Z得分为32.09分(3.99分),其中48%的人有倦怠,1-10健康量表得分为5.85分(2.45分)。结果因地区和角色的不同而有显著差异。开放式回答(N=202)建议增加人员配备,增加管理时间,以及更好的实践和领导沟通/团队合作。结论:我们的样本报告了延长应激反应的升高,但与之前的研究相似或略低的倦怠。与参与者分享了调查结果并制定了行动步骤;调查将每6个月重新进行一次。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Taking the pulse of primary care teams: Provider and staff wellness and burnout in a large primary care network
Context: Assessment of wellness and burnout in primary care often focuses on providers. Less is known about wellness and burnout in other primary care team members, including actions that would improve wellness. Objective: To assess wellness and burnout in primary care providers and staff and identify actions to increase work-related wellness. Study Design: Cross-sectional survey. Setting: Jefferson Health system, with 100 primary care practices in the Philadelphia region. Population studied: Survey was emailed to all primary care providers and staff (N=1155) in February 2021, including providers, behavioral health consultants, nurses, medical assistants and all other clinical staff, quality/research staff, and all administrative staff. Instrument: Thirty-item survey: demographic items (age, sex, race/ethnicity, practice region, professional role), Perceived Stress Reactivity Prolonged Reactivity Subscale (PRS), Abbreviated Maslach Burnout Inventory (aMBI) with emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment subscales, Mini-Z Burnout Survey , 1-10 rating of work-related wellness, and an open-ended question asking what one thing would improve work-related wellness. Outcome Measures: Primary outcomes were average wellness and burnout scores: mean(standard deviation) (SD) PRS, mean (SD) aMBI emotional exhaustion, median and interquartile range aMBI depersonalization and personal accomplishment, mean(SD) Mini-Z score and response to Mini-Z burnout item, and mean(SD) 1-10 wellness rating. Responses were compared across demographic categories for significant differences (p<.05). Open-ended responses were analyzed for themes. Results: 429 providers and staff completed the survey (37% response rate). All roles were represented. Mean PRS score was 3.89(1.55), aMBI: emotional exhaustion: 9.11(5.25), depersonalization 1.00(4.00), personal accomplishment 15.00(4.00), Mini-Z 32.09(3.99) with 48% reporting some burnout, and 5.85(2.45) on 1-10 wellness scale. Results varied significantly by region and role. Open-ended responses (N=202) recommended increased staffing, increased administrative time, and better practice and leadership communication/teamwork. Conclusions: Our sample reported elevated prolonged stress reactivity but similar/slightly lower burnout than prior studies. Findings were shared with participants and action steps developed; survey will be readministered every 6 months.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Interprofessional advanced access: results from a quality improvement intervention in primary care teams The combination of atypical diabetes with atypical optic atrophy, avoid missing the diagnosis of wolfram syndrome Quality improvement challenges encountered in primary care for diabetes management in the province of Quebec, Canada Implementing a safer and more reliable system to monitor test results at a teaching primary care facility Integration of Hepatitis C Treatment into Primary Care Practices: A Qualitative Study in Four New England States
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1